Note, however, it takes a lot of work to make the evolutionary changes available. In some cases, bolt on solutions have emerged to fill the gap. For key value data management, HBase is a perfect example. Several years ago, Eric Baldeschwieler was pointing out that HDFS could have filled that role. I think he was right, but the time it would take to get "HBase-type" functionality implemented via HDFS would have been a very long path indeed. In that case, the community filled the gap with HBase and it is being "back integrated" into Hadoop via YARN in a way that will make for a happier co-existence.
Right now we are seeing multiple new bolt on attempts to add functionality to Hadoop. For example, there are projects to add MPP databases on top of Hadoop itself. It's pretty obvious that this is at best a stop gap again - and one that comes at a pretty high price - I don't know of anyone that seriously thinks that a bolt on MPP is ultimately the right model for the Hadoop ecosystem. Since the open source alternatives look to be several years away from being "production ready", that raises an interesting question: is Hadoop evolution moving ahead at a similar or even more rapid rate to provide a native solution - a solution that will be more scalable, more adaptive and more open to a wider range of use cases and applications - including alternative declarative languages and compute models?
I think the answer is yes: while SQL on Hadoop via Hive is really the only open source game in town for production use cases - and its gotten some amazing performance gains in the first major iteration on Tez that we'll talk more about in the coming days - its clear that the Apache communities are beginning to deliver a new series of building blocks for data management at scale and speed: Optiq's Cost Based Optimizer; Tez for structuring multi-node operator execution; ORC and vectorization for optimal storage and compute; HCat for DDL. But what's missing? Memory management. And man has it ever been missing - that should have been obvious as well (and it was - one reason that so many people are interested in Spark for efficient algorithm development).
What we've seen so far has been two extremes available when it comes to supporting memory management (especially for SQL) - all disk and all memory. An obvious point here is that neither is ultimately right for Hadoop. This is a long winded intro to point to two, interrelated pieces by Julian Hyde and Sanjay Radia unveiling a model that is being introduced across multiple components called Discardable In-memory Materialized Query (DIMMQ). Once you see this model, it becomes obvious that the future of Hadoop for SQL - and not just SQL - is being implemented in real time. Check out both blog posts:
Whether you already have or are planning to build an Oracle WebCenter-based intranet, extranet or customer portal, its overall success hinges on its time to market, ability to scale, and the presence of user productivity tools. Attend this webinar to see how Fishbowl’s Portal Solution Accelerator (PSA) can provide an extensible framework that bundles reusable templates and page layouts, standards-based portlets, and in-place security administration. Join us to discover how this framework can be applied to build or improve your corporate intranet, partner extranet, or customer portal.
Date: Thursday, May 22nd
Time: 1:00 PM EST
The post A Framework Approach to Building an Oracle WebCenter Intranet, Extranet, or Portal appeared first on Fishbowl Solutions' C4 Blog.
You can read more about how GemFireXD and it's integration with PHD here.
While development team worked on GemFireXD I produced another open source web based tool named GemFireXD*Web. It's available with source code as follows.
GemFireXD *Web enables schema management from a web browser with features as follows
- Create all Schema Objects via Dialogs
- Generate DDL
- Run multiple SQL Commands, upload SQL files
- Browse / Administer Objects
- Browse / Administer HDFS stores/tables
- Browse / Administer Async Event Listeners
- View data distribution
- View Members / start parameters
There are two things I would note as well - Berdyaev is a fascinating critic and character in the development of Russian philosophy, specifically the religious inspired philosophers that in some way were heirs to Soloviev; Berdyaev operates in the role of a philosophical social commentator as opposed to a primarily theological tradition - in this case he is very different than contemporaries like Sergius Bulgakov or Pavel Florensky. I am most familiar with him through his earlier work, including the Meaning of the Creative Act. This book, of course, echoes Berdyaev's thinking, but he is quite clear in distinguishing his critique from the views of his subject, which makes the book all the more valuable in that it seems to avoid projecting his reading of Dostoevsky into Dostoevsky himself. Of course, others may disagree with this - and perhaps my own reading of both authors is colored by my own interpretation.
However, this certainly weighs on the question of how I would rank Berdyaev's critique of Dostoevsky: while it is not the subtlest discussion I have read, it is one of the simplest and in my view "most correct" readings of the author I have encountered. I would go so far as to suggest that Berdyaev's work deserves a primary place in the secondary literature on Dostoevsky. In fact, I would place it alongside Joseph Frank's monumental intellectual and literary biography as recommended companions to Dostoevsky's novels.
Addendum: I should have mentioned Berdyaev's final assesssment: "So great is the worth of Dostoevsky that to have produced him is by itself sufficient justification for the existence of the Russian people in the world." And that my friends is in my view true.
I'm currently at IOUG Collaborate 2014 in Las Vegas, and I recently finished my 2-hour deep dive into WebCenter. I collected a bunch of tips & tricks in 5 different areas: metadata, contribution, consumption, security, and integrations:
As usual, a lot of good presentations this year, but the Collaborate Mobile App makes it a bit tough to find them...
Thank you for visiting. This blog has been closed down and merged with the WebCenter Blog, which contains blog posts and other information about ECM, WebCenter Content, the content-enabling of business applications and other relevant topics. Please be sure to visit and bookmark https://blogs.oracle.com/webcenter/ and subscribe to stay informed about these topics and many more. From there, use the #ECM hashtag to narrow your focus to topics that are strictly related to ECM.
See you there!
The numbers are compelling: Oracle's share is 23.2%. A cluster of five other vendors have between 9% and 14% each. The rest is spread broadly, with each vendor commanding 2% or less. Oracle's share grew 23.3%, compared to growth of just under 12% for the sector as a whole.
I am glad to see this for a bunch of reasons. As Vice President of Embedded Technology at Oracle, I take a personal interest, of course. Oracle Berkeley DB, which Oracle acquired with Sleepycat in 2006, is aimed squarely at the embedded space. I have long maintained that embedded opportunities represent a significant source of new revenue and growth. Computers have escaped the data center, and special-purpose systems are getting deployed in living rooms, in the walls of buildings and in shirt pockets. There is an enormous amount of data travelling over networks and touching these systems.
The key to our success in the embedded space has been to assemble a family of products that address a wide range of requirements. A manufacturer building mobile telephone handsets needs to store crucial information reliably. So does a vendor building an optical network switch, and an ISV developing high-performance equity trading systems for financial markets. The three have very different requirements, though, and it's unrealistic to expect any single product to satisfy all of them.
All of our database products -- Oracle Database, Oracle TimesTen, Oracle Berkeley DB and Oracle Lite -- can be embedded in partner systems and deployed invisibly to end users. All contributed to our number one ranking by IDC.
It's not just the technology that has made us successful, though. The people who choose and deploy embedded databases are software developers. In the enterprise, we generally talk to DBAs and CIOs, but in the embedded world, we talk to architects and CTOs. Those conversations are different, and we have had to develop new expertise and new strategies as we have pursued embedded customers. Over the past several years, we've concentrated on building the technical, support and sales expertise necessary to win embedded business in countries around the globe. IDC's vendor share numbers suggest that we're doing okay.
Congratulations to Oracle's Embedded Global business team, and to the product development and support groups for all four products! This is a tremendous accomplishment.